[Python-Dev] RFC: PEP 460: Add bytes % args and bytes.format(args) to Python 3.5
Mark Shannon
mark at hotpy.org
Wed Jan 8 10:13:46 CET 2014
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Wed Jan 8 10:13:46 CET 2014
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] RFC: PEP 460: Add bytes % args and bytes.format(args) to Python 3.5
- Next message: [Python-Dev] RFC: PEP 460: Add bytes % args and bytes.format(args) to Python 3.5
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 06/01/14 13:24, Victor Stinner wrote: > Hi, > > bytes % args and bytes.format(args) are requested by Mercurial and [snip] I'm opposed to adding methods to bytes for this, as I think it goes against the reason for the separation of str and bytes in the first place. str objects are pieces of text, a list of unicode characters. In other words they have meaning independent of their context. bytes are just a sequence of 8bit clumps. The meaning of bytes depends on the encoding, but the proposed methods will have no encoding, but presume meaning. What does b'%s' % 7 do? u'%s' % 7 calls 7 .__str__() which returns a (unicode) string. By implication b'%s' % 7 would call 7 .__str__() and ... And then what? Use the "default" encoding? ASCII? Explicit is better than implicit. I am not opposed to adding new functionality, as long as it is not overloading the % operator or format() method. binascii.format() perhaps? Cheers, Mark.
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] RFC: PEP 460: Add bytes % args and bytes.format(args) to Python 3.5
- Next message: [Python-Dev] RFC: PEP 460: Add bytes % args and bytes.format(args) to Python 3.5
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list